New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-09-22
AGAINST THE CENTRAL TERlMONT
THE INTERSTATE COMMISSION FAvoRs TIL
GR,NGEas-CcNDITIoNs OF TRUNK-LINE CON

THE INTERSTATE COMMISSION FAvORs THE
GR,NGEas-CcNDITIoNs OF TRUNK.LINE COM
PETITION.
CHICAGO. Sept. 2l.-The Interstate Commerce Com.
mission to-day decided In favor Of the Vernon,
State Grange In case against the Central Vermont
Railroad. 1t appears that the Boston and Albany
Railroad Company and the Vermont State Grange
complained OF the Central Vermont Company fol-
charging a less rate In simar services, for long
nau q short huul the Centras lines between
Boston and Detroit, Milwaukee and Chicago The
commission declared the rates were Illegal.
In deciding tho the Commission holds that tho
Central Vermont aud the other roads which the Ma
opa Dispatch line operates responsible for the
made by which In law is their for the
purpose OF making them It further holds the
TOO and Albany has It's behalf ground OF
plant against defendants. Its grievance, II any, Is
that the defendant roads make lower charges long
haul traffic than makes. But this they have right to
do In the high local rates the Boston and Albany has
no concern. II said in the that 1t in
tersied in the question: because the Central Vermont
Ssui the Boston and Albany desired know il that it
might do the But this reason for institut-
facts aud would not follow tina, what would be lawful
to the Central Vermont woudhe lawful for the Boston
and Albany the circumstances and conditions OF whose
traffic might be altogether different The State Grange
however persons presumably interested In
the local had right 10 complain OF them, and on
It's complaint this disposed OF on the merits
The decision proceeds as follows:
tbe eSmpeiiiion which defendants in their
traffic Tho circumstances and conditions that
central Vermont lire spring from trunk
linz competition In the matter OF the Louisville and Nash
s oa We , the that Ssrs
syen subject 10 the jurisdiction OF the
mission would present such dsmarty of circumstances
AMI conditions between long and short haul traffic as TO Jus ny
charge the shorter haul on the same line In the
SANE direction. But published opinion shows that we
exceptional The trunk
line all subject 10 our Iar.aie -, oo,s,,,o.,
then the peculiar circumstances and condtohs
which he difference between the before us
and Railroad competition Ia general The prnc pal
interior lines compared with tie line OF the de-
pdans the latter compelled therefore 10 make low
rates their Through traffic. This me- esay OF the
suaton Is necessity which exists whenever ong
AMI Tho long line must accept che rates
iue and. perhaps make concessions from
In this respect there Is nothing peculiar IN the POSI-
the country claim they DO, ana
with Justice IL claim that could DO advanced
Me. Bos Detroit for example
might by the the Chesapeake aud Ohio Rail
Srs crater he spartare from direct line greater
would commonly low rates through
and the greater the liability to have the charges OF
traffic make tho carriage OF rUugh
tfsc But without eDlargng this branch OF he
case ourselves with saying that snc peculiar
facts found 10 exst in this case as VIII justify the
There only duty TO make the issue ana orner
found The Ceatral Vermont and ie
eher defendants concerned with h In Interstate tIa bs
and 81 Adams aud Boston and Ogdens,n
seponts must wholly cease aud de-
receiving respect to part OF such
irafc greater ensation for transportation OF nSe
the direction the shorter being ncu
within the longer distance In performing tins dn'y we
the intrinsic the rates heretofore
imposed That DO not thnk ~ was
evidence that when the local trAfcs are made
conform the letter OF the law as aCove directed they